Introduction
Gastric cancer remains a major global cause of cancer mortality. Early detection and accurate risk stratification are crucial for improving prognosis. Noninvasive, affordable serum tests are essential for mass screening. We compared the updated ABC method (pepsinogen I/II and gastrin-17) and a novel gastric cancer scoring system (“new scoring system”) regarding their effectiveness in screening early gastric cancer and precancerous lesions, risk stratification, and missed diagnosis prevention.
Aims & Methods
From April to November 2024, 7,304 asymptomatic individuals from Yuhang District, Hangzhou, China, participated in community-based screening. Serum pepsinogen I (PGI), PGII, PGI/II ratio (PGR), gastrin-17 (G-17), and H. pylori antibody were tested. Participants were stratified into low-, medium-, or high-risk groups using the ABC method and the new scoring system. A total of 654 medium- and high-risk participants underwent endoscopy and histopathology. Detection rates of gastric cancer, intraepithelial neoplasia, and atrophic gastritis were compared. Missed diagnosis rates in low-risk groups were analyzed assuming no endoscopy.
Results
The ABC method classified 90.55% as low-risk, 7.69% medium-risk, and 1.75% high-risk. The new scoring system classified 59.42% as low-risk, 32.67% medium-risk, and 7.91% high-risk. Endoscopy detected 11 gastric cancers (1.68%, 10 early-stage), 21 intraepithelial neoplasias (3.21%), and 98 atrophic gastritis cases (14.98%).
Gastric cancer detection rates in medium/high-risk groups were similar: ABC 1.58% (3/190), new scoring 1.77% (10/565) (p=1.000). Atrophic gastritis rates were comparable (ABC 14.21%, new scoring 15.04%, p=0.872). In the high-risk subgroup, the new scoring system detected significantly more atrophic gastritis cases (29.87% vs ABC 16.33%).
In low-risk groups, the ABC method would miss 8 of 11 gastric cancers (72.73%) without endoscopy; the new scoring system would miss only 1 case (9.09%, p=0.009). ROC analysis showed higher AUC for the new scoring system (0.60 vs 0.51). Decision curve analysis indicated superior net clinical benefit for the new scoring system at threshold probabilities above 0.2. The new scoring system showed higher sensitivity for early-stage disease detection, whereas ABC had slightly higher specificity.
Conclusion
Both systems showed similar performance in detecting gastric cancer and precancerous lesions among medium- and high-risk populations. The new scoring system significantly reduced missed diagnoses in low-risk groups and improved identification of high-risk precancerous conditions. Incorporating ROC, DCA, and accuracy metrics, the new scoring system offers enhanced flexibility for risk stratification, making it potentially more effective for population-based gastric cancer screening, especially in resource-limited settings. Further validation in larger cohorts is warranted.
Disclosure
Nothing to disclose.
